Stylos is the blog of Jeff Riddle, a Reformed Baptist Pastor in North Garden, Virginia. The title "Stylos" is the Greek word for pillar. In 1 Timothy 3:15 Paul urges his readers to consider "how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar (stylos) and ground of the truth."

This work represents a significant contribution to the
reception history of the Johannine Comma from Erasmus to the present. Any
future study of this controversial New Testament passage will need to consult,
benefit from, and make reference to this work.This reviewer is especially appreciative of McDonald’s debunking of the
Erasmian “myths” that have developed relating to his inclusion of the comma in
the third edition of the Dutch scholar’s Greek New Testament, as well those
relating to the history and influence of Codex Montfortianus.

One of the most intriguing ideas put forward by McDonald in
this study is his analysis and application of Michael Foucault’s concept of the
“episteme” to understand the division that has resulted over the acceptance of
the comma. An “episteme” is defined as “an internally consistent mode of
conceiving the world that determines which questions may conceivably be asked,
and thus judged to be either true or false” (146). In what he calls “the
premodern episteme” critical thought was “subordinated to a theological a
priori” (146). This meant, for example, “it was almost inconceivable to
doubt the inspiration of Scripture” (146). With the development of the
historical-critical method, beginning with Richard Simon and Baruch Spinoza,
critical questions were disconnected from theological ones. Though McDonald
does not use this term, we might call it the “modern episteme.” Rather than one
episteme neatly yielding sequentially to the next, as Foucault envisioned it,
McDonald suggests that “the episteme that existed before Spinoza and Simon
never ended. Rather their work fractured the hermeneutical consensus, leading
to a situation in which two epistemes came to exist in parallel” (147).
McDonald describes these two parallel epistemes as follows:

One maintains an essentially premodern attitude towards
Scripture, submitting judgement in textual matters to the ultimate criterion of
doctrine, while the other has accepted,
internalized and built upon the insights of Spinoza and Simon, using the tools
of philology, history and sociology to illuminate the beginnings of
Christianity (147).

He concludes, “I suggest that many of the conflicts between
academic liberal critics and conservative apologists arise out of a basic
epistemological incompatibility” (147). It is this fundamental “epistemological
incompatibility” that compels disagreement over the Johannine Comma as those
who hold the “premodern episteme” continue to a affirm it, while those who hold
the “modern episteme” continue to reject it.

According to McDonald then, the reception of the comma
represents a proverbial “fork in the road.” As he puts it, “One path was
followed by those who insisted on the providential preservation of Scripture.
The other was taken by those who believe that Scripture, whatever its source,
is subject to the same process of transmission as any other text” (12). The
story that results is one of “constantly competing claims, in which outcomes
are rarely clear and motives are often obscure” (12).

McDonald is hardly sympathetic to those who continue to
uphold the comma against the modern scholarly “consensus”, held since the
mid-twentieth century, that the “three heavenly witnesses” passage is a
spurious and late “interpolation” (9).He associates renewed debate over the comma to the “revival of the
Christian right,” conspiracy theories, and internet discussions, where it has
become a “hot-button issue” (9). McDonald suggests, “As a result of an
informational cascade amongst non-scholarly believers, the divide between
academic consensus and lay conviction is growing” (9). What McDonald does not
explicitly seem to acknowledge is that he is hardly a neutral observer. He
holds, in fact, to the “modern episteme,” which he so helpfully describes. Nevertheless,
McDonald is to be thanked not only for his historical review of the various
clashes over the comma, but also for his insights on the epistemological divide
over this matter. To paraphrase the poet Robert Frost, when we come to the
comma as a fork in the road, the path we take does indeed make all the
difference.

2 comments:

Here is a link J. C. Ryle’s Expository Thoughts on the Gospel of John with Notes

- http://www.tracts.ukgo.com/ryle_gospel_of_john.htm

Once you have clicked on the link, click on the pdf link for the preface and you'll find a very edifying read of JC Ryle's position on the inspiration of scripture and on translations and variants.

Excerpt from the preface - "The vexed question of “various readings,” I have deliberately left alone. It is not

because I have no opinion on the subject. But the real extent to which all the various readings would affect the meaning of Scripture, if they were admitted, is so much ex- aggerated, that it does not seem to me worth while to mix up the question with such a work as that which I have undertaken. The Greek text which I have been content to use throughout is that of the third Edition of Stephens (1550), edited by Scholefield. I do not say for a moment that it is the best text. I only say I have used it. The occasional shortcomings of our authorised English translation I have not hesitated to notice. I have frequently pointed out expressions which in my judgment are not rendered so literally or accurately as they might have been There is nothing perfect on earth. Our excellent translators undoubtedly fail occasionally to give the full sense of Greek words, and are not always sufficiently careful about tenses and the article. But it is useless to expect perfection in any translation. Translators are not in- spired, and are all liable to err. The “plenary verbal inspiration” which I firmly main- tain, is that of the original text of Scripture, and not of any translation.—I have no sympathy however with those who wish to have a new authorised English version of the Bible. I concede the shortcomings of the old version, but judging by the specimens of “new and improved” versions which I have seen, I doubt much whether we should gain anything by attempting to mend it. Taking it for all in all, the authorised English version is an admirable translation. I am quite content to “let well alone.” I now conclude this preface with an earnest prayer, that it may please God to par- don the many deficiencies of this volume, and to use it for His own glory and the good of souls. It has cost me a large amount of time and thought and labour. But if the Holy Ghost shall make it useful to the Church of Christ, I shall feel abundantly repaid. Ignorance of Scripture is the root of every error in religion, and the source of every heresy. To be allowed to remove a few grains of ignorance, and to throw a few rays of light on God’s precious Word is, in my opinion, the greatest honour that can be put on a Christian. J. C. RYLE, B. A., CHRIST CHURCH, OXFORD. Stradbroke Vicarage, Suffolk, February, 1865."

Thanks for this indication, I started to think about textual issues several years ago after I read Metzger's comments concerning the comma in Lee Strobel's work, "The case for Christ". Thinking about the genuineness of the comma led me to defense of the Traditional Text. So, McDonald's book is a good addition into the debate about that precious verse.